Outlaw: Judging by the emotional, nonargumentative, and inspecific language here, as well as the abundant grammatical errors in the original article, I have concluded this is nothing more than profuse feminine yakking.

L&I: This whole blog is horrible, so many of their articles aren’t even worthy of being addressed. However her Instagram page is even worse and since she resorts to blocking anyone who refutes her nonsense we’ll go after the outlet where she can’t stop us from debunking her.

Sonny: Her entire blog and page are nothing but a feminist circlejerk where dissenting opinion is quashed. Feminists know abortion is murder, that’s why they’re always so mad when they talk about it.

“6 Pro Life arguments that may have you stumped & how to respond

A few days ago I asked my instagram followers if they have heard any arguments by pro lifers that stumped them. I received many comments, but these were the most common questions that people didn’t quite know how to answer.

I am not a medical professional, or a lawyer so please do not use me as an academic source, I am only a woman with an opinion, and basic common knowledge.

Q: Why can’t you just use protection or birth control? (referring to cases not involving rape)

I always find this question ironic when it comes from pro lifers. If i had a nickel for every time a republican politician or an anti choice group ranted about how birth control causes cancer (which is 100% false) and how Plan B is an abortion pill (also really very false), and then immediately slammed the pregnant person for not doing more to prevent pregnancy, I would have a shit ton of nickels.

And before you say “not all pro lifers believe in that” consider this: If you are part of a movement that inspires fear and anger towards abortion and contraception, you ALL need to be on the same page for certain topics. Be aware of what information your own movement is spreading. It is literally scientifically proven that birth control does NOT cause cancer, but some of y’all just wanna ignore that and spread lies and inspire fear. So take that into consideration when you ask a young pregnant teen why they didn’t use birth control, because they might have been influenced by science deniers.

On the other hand, Birth Control is not accessible to everyone, and not everyone is able to take it. Some people might have parents or partners who manipulate them or prevent them from getting access. Its very common for abusive partners to use their partners pregnancy as a manipulative tactic to control them. Its common for abusive partners to take away their pills or trick them into taking placebos. Some people simply cannot afford it, due to lack of insurance, and lack of funds. There are all kinds of obstacles that keep people from accessing good healthcare, so next time you say “just use protection” keep in mind all of the people you’re not thinking about where its just not possible.

Whatever the situation, the most important thing to remember is that its none of your business. Unless you’re there doctor, don’t interrogate them about their own medical decisions. its not your business.

Outlaw: Firstly, accusing Pro Lifers of inaccurate statements on birth control is an irrelevant strawman fallacy . As is stating we are against using contraception. Of course someone couldn’t have been informed properly, this is not an excuse for committing a crime. If the person’s family or partner is capable of preventing them from buying $5 birth control options from a local drugstore, they are probably also capable of preventing them from getting pregnant in the first place. “It’s very common for abusive partners to use their partner’s pregnancy as a manipulative tactic to control them.” I agree, and it’s actually women that do this the most by far. As for people affording it, again, the most basic forms of contraception are around $5 and available at drugstores, gas stations, grocery stores etc. Plus, this is WAY cheaper than raising a child which some estimates put at $250,000 over 20 years.

L&I: I’m not going to contend that contraceptives cause cancer or that Plan B is an abortion bill. However But I will address this absurd claim:

“before you say ‘not all pro lifers believe in that’ consider this If you are part of a movement that inspires fear and anger towards abortion and contraception you ALL need to be on the same page for certain topics.”

The author mistakenly says that being pro life is being part of the pro life movement. Now there are movements that advocate the pro life position. Being pro life is not being part of a movement, it’s just a belief, a stance on an issue. People have different values for religious, cultural, and other reasons. Where ones values lies shapes how they’ll see other issues which may differ from others

But let’s turn our attention to the accessibility of contraceptives. Let me make this very clear, inaccessibility to birth control does not excuse you for the decision you willingly, consciously, and knowingly, made that would impregnate you.

However one thing that was said was that:

“It’s common for abusive partners to take away their pills or trick them into taking placebos.”

The author explicitly stated that she was not talking about cases referring to rape. I’m going to use that word refer to it as any sexual crime where a party was forced into an unwanted sexual act. What she described then is just that, sexual abuse to be specific; so this should not be an argument.

But what about the financial barrier to contraceptives? At most, male condoms cost $1 (each) and about $2 for female ones.

Sonny: Firstly, to claim that it is 100% false that birth control pills increase cancer risks is intellectually dishonest. They raise the risk of two different types of cancer; breast and cervical. To claim one pro-lifer should take responsibility for every other pro-lifer’s statements and beliefs is absurd, whatever happened to “not all Muslims”? People are not enslaved to some sort of group identity, they’re all unique individuals.

Most of this “answer” was incoherent babble. However the author doesn’t mention two things, condoms are $1/piece and are readily available. Secondly, why not just refrain from having unprotected sex before you’re ready to accept the risks that go along with it?

Finally, this entire section boils down to one thing, personal responsibility. Your actions have consequences, and you cannot “get rid” of them, especially if that consequence is a living human being.

Q: When does life begin?

Life is a cycle. Thats like asking “what came first the chicken or the egg?” An ovary is not dead, but its not alive either, at least not in the context that a full grown person is. A sperm and egg must meet to complete fertilization, and a fetus will not meet the 7 characteristics of life until birth when it can breathe and live without being attached to the pregnant person. Nowhere during this process is the organisms considered “dead” but its important to distinguish that “alive” doesn’t equal “personhood.”

Outlaw: What are the 7 characteristics of life? And newborns cannot survive without being attached to someone for quite some time after they are born.

L&I: A cell is a living organism, that is indisputable scientific fact. A zygote is a cell and it is alive. Regardless the author states that

“alive” [sic] doesn’t equal “personhood”

This is nuanced more in the next part.

Sonny: The author states that “being alive” is different than being a person, nonsense. When do you become a “person” and why?

Q: If someone’s personhood relies on their ability to support itself, then what about toddlers and mentally ill people? People need to take care of them!

A: The difference between mentally ill people and fetuses are that mentally ill people are actually sentient. They have feelings and they suffer. Fetuses do not. Someone status as a person doesn’t rely on their ability to make themselves sandwich or pay their bills or care for themselves. People do not require continuous nutrients from another person to stay alive. They sustain themselves. That persons body is still their own and they don’t need someone else body to keep them alive.

Outlaw: Regardless of your definition of ‘sentient’, some people suffering from mental illnesses will not fit the definition. And yes, newborn babies are sentient and do feel pain. Children actually start learning, mostly by hearing, long before they are born. This has been studied by language experts as well as doctors and scientists.

L&I: “The difference between mentally ill people and fetuses are that mentally ill people are actually sentient. They have feelings and they suffer. Fetuses do not. Someone status as a person doesn’t rely on their ability to make themselves sandwich or pay their bills or care for themselves. People do not require continuous nutrients from another person to stay alive. They sustain themselves. That person’s body is still their own and they don’t need someone else body to keep them alive.”

If rights are predicated on on a being’s consciousness, are people who are under anaesthesia (a state of unconsciousness) no longer a person or have rights as they are incapable of experiencing anything? Ditto for patients under a coma. Both have no sentience and are incapable of sustaining themselves.

But if you going to counter with that they don’t need someone else’s body to sustain themselves that’s not exactly true either. They need the physical labor of others in order to survive. Someone needs to use their body so that they can be fed, to pay for their treatment, etc. Using someone’s labor is using their body, by definition labor is “physical or mental exertion.”

Whether or not this person is within a person’s body or external to is irrelevant because in the end, it’s using the supporters (or host’s) body to maintain life.

Sonny: The definition of sentient is “the ability to feel or perceive things” Fetuses can indeed respond to stimuli to a certain extent. People in a coma or people affected with certain mental ailments are sometimes not “sentient” and cannot respond to stimuli, so I appreciate making an argument for us.

Q: People shouldn’t use abortion as a form of birth control by getting one every time they get pregnant.

Many people have reasons for not being pregnant, such as living situations, domestic abuse, not being able to afford it or not being able to carry a pregnancy without life threatening risks. you are not entitled to these reason.

That information is between them and their doctor. You are not entitled to that information nor is anyone else. Mind your own business and stop judging people on what they do with their body.

Outlaw: The person should’ve thought about their living conditions before engaging in intercourse. Same goes for domestic abuse. Same goes for not being able to afford it. And I would love to hear @pro_choice’s rationale behind stating a pregnancy can be life threatening. One cannot kill their baby simply because they made the mistake of conceiving him or her. Yes we are entitled to these reasons, and yes it is our business, just as much as if our neighbor was shot dead in his home.

L&I: The pro life person presupposes that abortion is (generally speaking) a crime. Criminal activity is an offense against society as a whole and warrants preventive measures against abortions for unjustified reasons. These include, but are not limited to, financial and personal reasons

Sonny: “Many people have reasons for not being pregnant”

No, what you mean is people have many reasons as to why they’d prefer to not be pregnant. So what? Your desires do not give you the right to kill a human being.

Q: Why doesn’t the father get a say?

The father (aka sperm donor) isn’t carrying the pregnancy. It doesn’t matter how they contributed. Unless they want to carry the pregnancy for the entire 9 months, they dont get to give consent on behalf go the pregnant person. Forcing someone into pregnancy is just as bad as forcing someone into an abortion. Just because someone gyrated for maybe an hour and had an orgasm isn’t the same thing as carrying a pregnancy for almost a year, then enduring childbirth and everything that comes with it.

The follow up question after this is always “What if the father wants the baby but the mother doesn’t? why can’t the father take the baby and leave” to which I always respond that the pregnant person is not an incubator. We are not here to breed babies so you can just take it and leave. Its our life, not yours, so we shouldn’t be forced to breed like cattle.

Outlaw: If the father plays no role, I expect the author to call for the immediate dissolution of any kind of court ordered child support payments.

L&I: A father has natural ownership over his offspring, his inability to incubate it without a mother does not retract his rights to the child. So it’s not just your life, is a shared life between mother and father because it was created by both.

Sonny: Absolute nonsense, a father has ownership of his children, just as a mother does, it is neither the mothers or fathers entirely. As Outlaw said, if the father has no ownership of his child, why do they (fathers) pay the vast majority of child support?

Q: Why is it double murder when a pregnant person is killed?

A: First, in some states, legislation has increased the criminal penalties for crimes involving pregnant people, but those laws focus on the harm done of the pregnant person, and the loss of the pregnancy, not on the rights of the fetus. Giving the fetus it’s own rights as a citizen is a slippery slope that might lead to regulating and criminalizing behavior of pregnant people. (Source)”

Outlaw: As an anarchist, I don’t really care much for what the law says, my colleagues can focus more on that if they wish. I will say that most states will disregard the rights of the unborn child because they cannot recognize them logically without undermining federal law. And I do hope the behavior of pregnant people is criminalized in some way. Pregnant women should not be allowed to smoke or drink, or perform much strenuous activity.

L&I: I too have little regard for what the state says the law is. I agree with what Outlaw has to say.

Sonny: This entire “argument” was copy pasted. Furthermore, the law isn’t a perfect morality, remember slavery and Jim Crow, folks?

Concluding Remarks

Outlaw: This is the result of someone with below average intelligence attempting to make an argument going by only what she has been brainwashed to hear in feminine illogical echo chambers. For more from me on this topic, follow these links:

L&I: What I’ve learned here is that @pro_choice tries to make normative statements without any grasp of philosophy. At some points she tries to give a natural argument, other times its utilitarian, but all of it just based of her feelings and not rational thought.

Sonny: This entire article is basically emotional babble, a sort of confirmation bias. She will continue to post about how “we’re obsessed with her” hardly, we just think calling out an account with 50k and adding some much needed opposition to her echochamber is fun. Also we like babies and would prefer if you wouldn’t advocate and normalize the murder of them.